Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: ORF FAL type 3 receivers

  1. #1
    U.N.C.L.E. Illya Kuryakin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    The Third Coast
    Posts
    3,731
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)

    Default ORF FAL type 3 receivers

    I hadn't reallized that ORF is planning on manufacturing their own FAL type 3 receivers;
    http://rapidfire.targetweb.net/cgi-b...m=on&ppinc=big

    Geez, where have I been
    I gotta get out more often.................


    Did I do that?

  2. #2
    Gunco Member mtdew69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    125
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default

    and i bet that they will be as plug and play as their m76 receivers... id buy a vulcan before i get a milled receiver from orf

  3. #3
    Gunco Rookie bowser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    SE Michigan
    Posts
    12
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default

    they've added T1, T2 and Inch preproduction purchase as well as the T3.
    I'm looking forward to regretting this........

    Vegetarian: Indian word for bad hunter

  4. #4
    Administrator pirate56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    4,996
    Feedback Score
    31 (100%)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mtdew69
    and i bet that they will be as plug and play as their m76 receivers... id buy a vulcan before i get a milled receiver from orf
    I think buying one before there is any feed back on the quality is a little scary.
    as you said, the m76 and galil receivers seem to have some issues.

  5. #5
    Gunco Veteran panaceabeachbum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,071
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)

    Default

    the big problem i see is they dont include an ejector block and you cant use the one from your parts set as it is an NFA specific part and has a cutout for the full auto trip. I assume they will be making the ejector block also and dsa probably stocks them but will def add to the price

  6. #6
    U.N.C.L.E. Illya Kuryakin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    The Third Coast
    Posts
    3,731
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)

    Default

    I never thought the full auto type FAL ejector block was a NFA item. The no-no is to cut the upper receiver to accept the auto (safety) sear on the pin block w/o proper liscensing. Some early Imbel FAL receivers were imported with the full auto ejector block installed but the receiver was not cut to accept the sear. This is the way I've understood it unless I'm either wrong or implementation of the regs have changes since then.


    Did I do that?

  7. #7
    Gunco Veteran panaceabeachbum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,071
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)

    Default

    I bought , and had to return, a couple of Imbel rec in the late 80's from dealer wharehouse that came with FA ejector blocks installed. I was told that they had to be replaced with semi ejector blocks. I do not know for fact that this is an issue but i cant imagine that dealer wharehouse went to the trouble unless prompted to do so by ATF. I do know the rec where not cut for the trip on the hinge pin but the window for the lever was visible in the block and the replacement rec didnt have the cutout visible in the ejector block.
    I would think that as cheap as century is they would be using the FA ejector block in their FAL and l1a1 builds if it was legal to do so

  8. #8
    Gunco Veteran panaceabeachbum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,071
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)

    Default

    here is what ATF says on the matter, notice it says it could meet the definition of a machine gun or "might" not

    DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
    BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO AND FIREARMS
    WASHINGTON, DC 20226

    MAR 20 2000

    903050:CHB
    3311

    Dear Mr. Bardwell:

    This refers to your letter of February 17, 2000, in which you asked
    if ATF would consider an FAL rifle assembled with a U.S. made
    receiver and an FAL machinegun ejector block to be a machinegun.

    The term "machinegun" is defined in section 5845(b) of the National
    Firearms Act. An FAL style rifle with a machinegun style ejector
    block could meet the definition of a machinegun, or it might not
    meet the definition of machinegun. If the rifle was capable of
    firing automatically, it would be a machinegun regardless of the
    style of ejector block used.

    We trust that the foregoing has been responsive to your inquiry.
    If you have further questions concerning this matter, please
    contact us.


    Sincerely yours,


    [signed]
    Edward M. Owen, Jr.
    Chief, Firearms Technology Branch

  9. #9
    U.N.C.L.E. Illya Kuryakin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    The Third Coast
    Posts
    3,731
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)

    Default

    I'm not trying to argue the point either way, but sometimes a distributor will go above and beyond the letter of the law (or regulations) to be above any possible legal challenge or change of implementation of the statutes. One example that comes to mind is the change in demill processes that does/does not leave the stamped receiver bits still attached for AK kits. As far as I know this was not a reaction to a change in BATF regulations but done to ensure no doubt or question as to compliance to those regulations. Failure to do so might potentially put the entire imported shipment under BATF impound or seizure. It could be considered cheap insurance that the kits will not be confiscated as contriband. As to Century installing semi blocks, it is probably cheaper and therefore more cost effective to drill and pin new semi blocks instead of trying to retrofit used FA ejector blocks.

    After all that is said and done, bottom line is I don't know for sure.

    Edit; Just read the ATF letter you posted. Good information. Makes me believe that the semi ejectors are installed as an insurance measure of compliance.

    PS - I've got to learn to type faster. Maybe it's just that I think too slow


    Did I do that?

  10. #10
    Gunco Veteran panaceabeachbum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,071
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)

    Default

    good point on century not reusing them, hadnt thought of the fitting issue.

    Looking the letter from ATF over it does appear that they didnt say it would be in violation, If I read the letter correctly it seems it would indeed be OK to use the fa ejector block as long as the rifle was only cabaple of firing one shot per pull of the trigger. I think for safeties sake if i were reusing an FA ejector block i would weld up the window the trip lever passes thru.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Search tags for this page

There are currently no search engine referrals.
Click on a term to search our site for related topics.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •